AIMS: To examine the effects of reduced nicotine cigarettes on smoking behavior, toxicant exposure, dependence and abstinence. DESIGN: Randomized, parallel arm, semi-blinded study. Setting University of Minnesota Tobacco Use Research Center. INTERVENTIONS: Six weeks of: (i) 0.05 mg nicotine yield cigarettes; (ii) 0.3 mg nicotine yield cigarettes; or (iii) 4 mg nicotine lozenge; 6 weeks of follow-up. Measurements Compensatory smoking behavior, biomarkers of exposure, tobacco dependence, tobacco withdrawal and abstinence rate. FINDINGS: Unlike the 0.3 mg cigarettes, 0.05 mg cigarettes were not associated with compensatory smoking behaviors. Furthermore, the 0.05 mg cigarettes and nicotine lozenge were associated with reduced carcinogen exposure, nicotine dependence and product withdrawal scores. The 0.05 mg cigarette was associated with greater relief of withdrawal from usual brand cigarettes than the nicotine lozenge. The 0.05 mg cigarette led to a significantly higher rate of cessation than the 0.3 mg cigarette and a similar rate as nicotine lozenge. CONCLUSION: The 0.05 mg nicotine yield cigarettes may be a tobacco product that can facilitate cessation; however, future research is clearly needed to support these preliminary findings.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To examine the effects of reduced nicotine cigarettes on smoking behavior, toxicant exposure, dependence and abstinence. DESIGN: Randomized, parallel arm, semi-blinded study. Setting University of Minnesota Tobacco Use Research Center. INTERVENTIONS: Six weeks of: (i) 0.05 mg nicotine yield cigarettes; (ii) 0.3 mg nicotine yield cigarettes; or (iii) 4 mg nicotine lozenge; 6 weeks of follow-up. Measurements Compensatory smoking behavior, biomarkers of exposure, tobacco dependence, tobacco withdrawal and abstinence rate. FINDINGS: Unlike the 0.3 mg cigarettes, 0.05 mg cigarettes were not associated with compensatory smoking behaviors. Furthermore, the 0.05 mg cigarettes and nicotine lozenge were associated with reduced carcinogen exposure, nicotine dependence and product withdrawal scores. The 0.05 mg cigarette was associated with greater relief of withdrawal from usual brand cigarettes than the nicotine lozenge. The 0.05 mg cigarette led to a significantly higher rate of cessation than the 0.3 mg cigarette and a similar rate as nicotine lozenge. CONCLUSION: The 0.05 mg nicotine yield cigarettes may be a tobacco product that can facilitate cessation; however, future research is clearly needed to support these preliminary findings.
Authors: Saul Shiffman; Carolyn M Dresler; Peter Hajek; Simon J A Gilburt; Darren A Targett; Kenneth R Strahs Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2002-06-10
Authors: S S Hecht; S G Carmella; M Chen; J F Dor Koch; A T Miller; S E Murphy; J A Jensen; C L Zimmerman; D K Hatsukami Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1999-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Steven G Carmella; Shaomei Han; Anne Fristad; Yiying Yang; Stephen S Hecht Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Neal L Benowitz; Sharon M Hall; Susan Stewart; Margaret Wilson; Delia Dempsey; Peyton Jacob Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Dorothy K Hatsukami; Charlotte Lemmonds; Yan Zhang; Sharon E Murphy; Chap Le; Steven G Carmella; Stephen S Hecht Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2004-06-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Eric C Donny; Rachel L Denlinger; Jennifer W Tidey; Joseph S Koopmeiners; Neal L Benowitz; Ryan G Vandrey; Mustafa al'Absi; Steven G Carmella; Paul M Cinciripini; Sarah S Dermody; David J Drobes; Stephen S Hecht; Joni Jensen; Tonya Lane; Chap T Le; F Joseph McClernon; Ivan D Montoya; Sharon E Murphy; Jason D Robinson; Maxine L Stitzer; Andrew A Strasser; Hilary Tindle; Dorothy K Hatsukami Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew C Harris; Paul R Pentel; Danielle Burroughs; Mylissa D Staley; Mark G Lesage Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Dorothy K Hatsukami; Kenneth A Perkins; Mark G Lesage; David L Ashley; Jack E Henningfield; Neal L Benowitz; Cathy L Backinger; Mitch Zeller Journal: Tob Control Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: M De Biasi; I McLaughlin; E E Perez; P A Crooks; L P Dwoskin; M T Bardo; P R Pentel; D Hatsukami Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Allison N Kurti; Ryan Redner; Janice Y Bunn; Katherine Tang; Tyler Nighbor; Alexa A Lopez; Diana R Keith; Andrea C Villanti; Cassandra A Stanton; Diann E Gaalema; Nathan J Doogan; Antonio Cepeda-Benito; Megan E Roberts; Julie Phillips; Maria A Parker; Amanda J Quisenberry; Stephen T Higgins Journal: Prev Med Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Kathy Z Tang; Rachel L Dumont; E Paul Wileyto; Steven G Carmella; Stephen S Hecht; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Tracy T Smith; Joseph S Koopmeiners; Katelyn M Tessier; Esa M Davis; Cynthia A Conklin; Rachel L Denlinger-Apte; Tonya Lane; Sharon E Murphy; Jennifer W Tidey; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Eric C Donny Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 5.043